A mechanical model for magnetized relativistic blastwaves
Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, ISSN: 1365-2966, Vol: 507, Issue: 2, Page: 1788-1794
2021
- 7Citations
- 87Usage
- 4Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations7
- Citation Indexes7
- Usage87
- Downloads73
- Abstract Views14
- Captures4
- Readers4
Article Description
The evolution of a relativistic blastwave is usually delineated under the assumption of pressure balance between forward- and reverse-shocked regions. However, such a treatment usually violates the energy conservation law, and is inconsistent with existing magnetohydrodynamic numerical simulation results. A mechanical model of non-magnetized blastwaves was proposed in previous work to solve the problem. In this paper, we generalize the mechanical model to the case of a blastwave driven by an ejecta with an arbitrary magnetization parameter $\sigma_{\rm ej}$. We test our modified mechanical model by considering a long-lasting magnetized ejecta and found that it is much better than the pressure-balance treatment in terms of energy conservation. For a constant central engine wind luminosity $L_{\rm ej} = 10^{47} {\rm erg ~ s^{-1}}$ and $\sigma_{\rm ej}<10$, the deviation from energy conservation is negligibly small at small radii but only reaches less than $25{{\ \rm per\ cent}}$ even at 1019 cm from the central engine. For a finite lifetime of the central engine, the reverse shock crosses the magnetized ejecta earlier for the ejecta with a higher $\sigma_{\rm ej}$, which is consistent with previous analytical and numerical results. In general, the mechanical model is more precise than the traditional analytical models with results closer to those of numerical simulations.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85116583664&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stab2000; https://academic.oup.com/mnras/article/507/2/1788/6324592; http://academic.oup.com/mnras/article-pdf/507/2/1788/40048084/stab2000.pdf; http://academic.oup.com/mnras/advance-article-pdf/doi/10.1093/mnras/stab2000/39170242/stab2000.pdf; https://digitalscholarship.unlv.edu/physastr_fac_articles/672; https://digitalscholarship.unlv.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1672&context=physastr_fac_articles; https://dx.doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stab2000
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know